Subject: [rddp] RDMAP PROTO writeup

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2005 13:19:31 -0400

The PROTO process (cf. draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding-05.txt)
is being used for the RDMAP draft.  Here is the PROTO writeup:

               	An RDMA Protocol Specification 
                   draft-ietf-rddp-rdmap-05.txt

Requested Publication Status: Proposed Standard
PROTO shepherd: David L. Black (RDDP WG Chair)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

   1.a) Have the chairs personally reviewed this version of the Internet
        Draft (ID), and in particular, do they believe this ID is ready
        to forward to the IESG for publication?

Yes.

   1.b) Has the document had adequate review from both key WG members
        and key non-WG members?

Yes, primarily from WG members.

        Do you have any concerns about the
        depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed?

The draft has had limited review outside the WG.

   1.c) Do you have concerns that the document needs more review from a
        particular (broader) perspective (e.g., security, operational
        complexity, someone familiar with AAA, etc.)?

No.

   1.d) Do you have any specific concerns/issues with this document that
        you believe the ADs and/or IESG should be aware of?  For
        example, perhaps you are uncomfortable with certain parts of the
        document, or have concerns whether there really is a need for
        it.  In any event, if your issues have been discussed in the WG
        and the WG has indicated it that it still wishes to advance the
        document, detail those concerns in the write-up.

No.

   1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
        represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
        others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
        agree with it?

The WG as a whole understands and agrees with this document.

   1.f) [... not sent to the WG ...]

   1.g) Have the chairs verified that the document adheres to all of the
        ID nits? (see http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html).

The ID nits checker found a few minor format problems (long lines, non-
ascii characters, missing apostrophe in "Authors Addresses) that are
readily correctable by the RFC Editor.

   1.h) Is the document split into normative and informative references?

Yes.

        Are there normative references to IDs, where the IDs are not
        also ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state?
        (note here that the RFC editor will not publish an RFC with
        normative references to IDs, it will delay publication until all
        such IDs are also ready for publication as RFCs.)

There are four normative references to Internet-Drafts:

o draft-hilland-rddp-verbs - This reference is not cited in the body
	of this (RDMA Protocol) draft, which is a good thing because the
	verbs draft will not be published as an RFC.  An RFC Editor Note
	should be used to delete this reference if the RDMA Protocol draft
	is not revised prior to IESG approval.
o draft-ietf-rddp-ddp - Publication has been requested along with
	this draft.
o draft-ietf-rddp-mpa - Publication will be requested within
	the next 2 weeks.
o draft-ietf-rddp-security - Publication has been requested along
	with this draft.

   1.i) For Standards Track and BCP documents, the IESG approval
        announcement includes a write-up section with the following
        sections:

        *    Technical Summary

        *    Working Group Summary

        *    Protocol Quality

   1.j) Please provide such a write-up.  Recent examples can be found in
        the "protocol action" announcements for approved documents.

-- Technical Summary

   This document defines a Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol 
   (RDMAP) that operates over the Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP 
   protocol).  RDMAP provides read and write services directly to 
   applications and enables data to be transferred directly into ULP 
   Buffers without intermediate data copies. It also enables a kernel 
   bypass implementation. 

-- Working Group Summary

   RDMAP supports both DMA (direct read/write to identified buffer) style
   and message (send, receiver selects buffer) style transfers.  The WG has
   strong consensus that both transfer styles are required in order for an
   implementation to exercise control over all memory buffer resources
   used for network communication, and to appropriately support usage
   where a DMA style transfer is followed by a message style transfer
   whose reception is used to infer completion of the preceding DMA
   style transfer.

-- Protocol Quality

   The protocol has been reviewed for the rddp WG by David L. Black.

----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
rddp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rddp